Whitehousel Mary E A, Lubin Yael
Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, Blaustein Institute for Desert Research, Ben Gurion Universiy, Sede Boker, Israel 84990.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2005 Aug;80(3):347-61. doi: 10.1017/s1464793104006694.
Many models have been advanced to suggest how different expressions of sociality have evolved and are maintained. However these models ignore the function of groups for the particular species in question. Here we present a new perspective on sociality where the function of the group takes a central role. We argue that sociality may have primarily a reproductive, protective, or foraging function, depending on whether it enhances the reproductive, protective or foraging aspect of the animal's life (sociality may serve a mixture of these functions). Different functions can potentially cause the development of the same social behaviour. By identifying which function influences a particular social behaviour we can determine how that social behaviour will change with changing conditions, and which models are most pertinent. To test our approach we examined spider sociality, which has often been seen as the poor cousin to insect sociality. By using our approach we found that the group characteristics of eusocial insects is largely governed by the reproductive function of their groups, while the group characteristics of social spiders is largely governed by the foraging function of the group. This means that models relevant to insects may not be relevant to spiders. It also explains why eusocial insects have developed a strict caste system while spider societies are more egalitarian. We also used our approach to explain the differences between different types of spider groups. For example, differences in the characteristics of colonial and kleptoparasitic groups can be explained by differences in foraging methods, while differences between colonial and cooperative spiders can be explained by the role of the reproductive function in the formation of cooperative spider groups. Although the interactions within cooperative spider colonies are largely those of a foraging society, demographic traits and colony dynamics are strongly influenced by the reproductive function. We argue that functional explanations help to understand the social structure of spider groups and therefore the evolutionary potential for speciation in social spiders.
许多模型已被提出,以说明社会性的不同表现形式是如何进化和维持的。然而,这些模型忽略了群体对于所讨论的特定物种的功能。在此,我们提出了一种关于社会性的新观点,其中群体的功能起着核心作用。我们认为,社会性可能主要具有繁殖、保护或觅食功能,这取决于它是否增强了动物生活中的繁殖、保护或觅食方面(社会性可能兼具这些功能)。不同的功能可能会导致相同社会行为的发展。通过确定哪种功能影响特定的社会行为,我们可以确定该社会行为将如何随条件变化而变化,以及哪些模型最为相关。为了检验我们的方法,我们研究了蜘蛛的社会性,蜘蛛社会性常常被视为昆虫社会性的“穷亲戚”。通过运用我们的方法,我们发现真社会性昆虫的群体特征在很大程度上由其群体的繁殖功能所支配,而社会性蜘蛛的群体特征在很大程度上由群体的觅食功能所支配。这意味着与昆虫相关的模型可能与蜘蛛并不相关。这也解释了为什么真社会性昆虫发展出了严格等级制度,而蜘蛛社会则更加平等。我们还运用我们的方法来解释不同类型蜘蛛群体之间的差异。例如,群居性和盗寄生性群体特征的差异可以通过觅食方式的不同来解释,而群居性蜘蛛和合作性蜘蛛之间的差异可以通过繁殖功能在合作性蜘蛛群体形成中的作用来解释。尽管合作性蜘蛛群体内部的相互作用在很大程度上是觅食社会的相互作用,但人口统计学特征和群体动态受到繁殖功能的强烈影响。我们认为,功能性解释有助于理解蜘蛛群体的社会结构,进而理解社会性蜘蛛物种形成的进化潜力。